Skip to comments.Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Posted on 11/30/2001 7:53:38 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen
Patrick Leahy. That´s the answer.
A la Johnny Carson´s character Carnak the Magnificent, the question is, What´s wrong with the Senate?!
Of course, since Jim Jeffords is the other Senator from Vermont, the question could be, What´s wrong with people in Vermont? Jeffords brazenly betrayed the campaign promises and positions for which Vermonters elected him, in effect overturning the will of the people, all for personal benefit.
Leaky Leahy,´ who earned the nickname for repeated betrayals of security information while ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee during the 80´s, absolutely refuses to fulfill his Constitutionally mandated duty to vet judicial appointments by the new Presidentsimply refusing to bring them before his committee. He now continues his assault on Attorney General Ashcroft, the shameless and blatantly partisan assault began during Ashcroft ´s confirmation hearings for the post of Attorney General.
Mr. Leahy and cohorts have facilitated the terrorists who perpetrated the September 11 attacks by their mindlessly irresponsible support of immigration policies that allowed and empowered the attackers to plot and carry out their attacks, and to establish who knows what other biological or nuclear plans. And, even now, he and the rest of his ilk (on both sides of the aisle!) are not willing to tighten up those suicidal policies. Further, he wants to thwart the President´s efforts to do so through his Constitutionally provided executive powers.
Even before his current ploy directed at the GOP and President Bush, Leahy was guilty of gross negligence, at least, by his refusal to even bring up Bush´s judicial appointments for discussion and vote. The Senate´s role in Executive Branch appointments is advise and consent,´ whereby they consider appointees based on qualifications for the job, character and discernible record (that Leahy is in a position to judge anyone´s character is a monumental travesty!). Nowhere does the Constitution empower Senators to use ideological criteria in this function, but that´s what Leahy is doing, with the encouragement of his superior Tom Daschle, another sleazebag. In fact, the Constitution practically screams for non-partisan review of such appointees, demanding instead a statesman-like focus on standards that are for the good of the nation. And Leahy ain´t a statesman; he´s a Democrat.
While I can´t blame the people of Vermont for wanting to send him to D.C. so they don´t have to look at him, I can´t forgive them for continuing to allow himin their nameto obstruct and make a mockery of the Constitution that he has sworn to uphold. Perhaps it comes from the air in the northeast, or maybe a too-close and too-long association with Ted Kennedy, another absolutely shameless liar and liberal ideologue with a likewise disreputable past; something about a bridge, but I digress. Whatever the cause, Patrick Leahy is a prime example of all that´s wrong with the U.S. Senatehe´s been there so long that he believes it is his will, not that of the people of Vermont or the United States, that is important. So secure is he in his position that he dares to blatantly refuse, on no grounds other than ideology, to even perform his Constitutionally mandated job. Try telling your boss you simply refuse to do a major part of your job, for whatever reason. But Leahy´s boss´, the people of Vermont, are apparently paying no more attention than the rest of the nation.
Leahy complains that Bush´s recent executive order about military tribunals for foreignahem, I say againfor foreign terrorists doesn´t respect the checks and balances that make up our constitutional framework, and that the executive order cuts out judicial review, and that it leaves Congress out of the decision. Let me address that last one first: Gee, wonder why anyone would want to cut you out of any sensitive decision-making process, Mr. Leahy? Could it be your proven and repeated habit for spilling your guts to reporters for your own benefit and the detriment of the nation, which caused you to have to resign from the Intelligence Committee? (And why are those privy to sensitive information not subject to criminal charges, as you or I would certainly be had we found such documents and spread them around? Should they not instead be held to a higher standard of accountability, justified by their access to such secrets?)
But even aside from his leakiness,´ why is it that Mr. Leahy didn´t make these same complaints while Bill Clinton was issuing the most executive orders of any other president in history? If he´s so enamored of Constitutional checks and balances, why isn´t he equally committed to performing his clearly defined Constitutional duty to consider and vote on executive appointments? Most Americans don´t pay much attention to the goings-on in the Boys´ Club of the U.S. Senate, or they´d notice that there are very few checks´ on this unbalanced bunch.
There was a time in this nation when Mr. Leahy (and others) would be rightly accused of something akin to treason, not only for thwarting the intention of the Constitution and the duly elected judicial-appointing power of the President, but for willfully impairing the efforts of the President, during wartime, to root out all terrorists and their supporters. I knew there were good reasons for Bush to ask for an official declaration of war, and this is one of them. As usual, the Stupid Party left the Democrats enough room to continue their anti-American dirty work. But don´t expect the media to report much about this, except in a light favorable to Mr. Leahy, since he´s attacking a conservative, the media´s favorite snack.
What´s wrong with the U.S. Senate? Well, let´s see: they´re liars hypocrites smug, arrogant out-of-control demagogues who answer to practically no one, and who use their positions to ensure re-election and the continuation of their irresponsible, self-serving and America-be-damned behavior and legislation. To put it simply: they don´t do what they´re elected to do, which is to fulfill their Constitutional duties. Daschle, Kennedy, Lott, Specter, Leahy hey, there are 100 of them, and each one is worse than the last. We can´t throw them all out at the same time, unfortunately, since only one third are up for election every two years.
But if the third that are running this coming year are all defeated soundly by Americans who are as sick as I am of their high-handedness and disdain for the American people, maybe just maybe the rest of them will get the message. And if another third are dumped two years hence ? That´s my Christmas wish this year: that the American people, awakened by terror, will finally notice what has become of their government, and will get their head out of their collective backside and reclaim the Senate from pinhead, no-character hacks like Patrick Leahy. You wouldn´t let this guy rake your yard or wash your car, for fear of him breaking or stealing something and he's the chairman of the Judiciary Committee?!
Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping
Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001
Author: John Nowacki
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001
Author: Thomas L. Jipping
Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published:October 26, 2001
Author: Mary Mostert
Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: John Nowacki
Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001
Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: www.washtimes.com/ Author: washtimes
Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001
Author: Tom Jipping
Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: THE WASHINGTON TIMES; Published: Oct 24, 2001
Author: Dave Boyer